The story of the Pilbara strike has been told in many different forms over many years now, and those forms can have a profound influence on its content. Most importantly, the ways in which Aboriginal people represent the past tend to differ markedly from those of scholars working in the discipline of history. Many of the stories Aboriginal people have told about the strike belong to an oral tradition in which the meaning and significance of the event in the present, rather than in the past, is of the utmost importance; and, as the needs of the present have changed, the nature of the stories being told has shifted as well. From a European scholarly point of view, these stories, especially when they are rendered in ways that preserve their original idiom or spirit, are invaluable as they reveal much about the ways in which the past, as it is remembered, has both shaped the marrngu sense of self and informed their actions. At the same time, oral histories, told by both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people, can shed light on the strike itself, since they reveal aspects of it that are barely evident in the contemporary historical record.

Beginnings

It is often assumed that stories are told only after an event or an experience. But stories are often formulated and told beforehand, thereby making possible the actions they describe. In a political context, telling a story can not only help actors forge a plan for action but also constitute a sense of community among those who will execute it. In the case of the strike, Don McLeod and the principal Aboriginal figures constructed a narrative about the Aboriginal people’s oppression and a struggle to free themselves; they told that story repeatedly to the marrngu; and finally they sought to enact that story together. And, once the strike began, telling the story of what happened and was happening was just as important, since a propaganda battle erupted between the opposing sides.

Remembering the Strike

The stories that were told at the time of the strike by the strikers themselves and their supporters have had a profound influence on nearly all of the historical accounts that have been told since. This story-telling has several key features. For example, the strike was first planned at a meeting that took place at Skull Springs in 1942; the strike began on 1 May 1946, and nearly all the people walked off the stations that day; there were simply three leaders: Clancy McKenna, Dooley Binbin and Don McLeod; and the Aboriginal strikers held together as a coherent group and never really returned to the stations as workers. These stories might be regarded as myth rather than history, not least because they were told by the marrngu in a similar manner to the one they used to relate many traditional stories about mythical heroes. And, for those who later founded or supported the cooperative, they provided a charter for future action.

History and Legend

Over time, the strike increasingly became the subject of both history and legend, rather than memory alone. In this process, many accounts tended to be influenced more and more by previous tellings of the story. This process can be described as narrative accrual or narrative coalescence. As this occurred, the story of the strike was increasingly told in a way in which particular people and certain events symbolised what happened.

Commemoration

In recent years, the strike has increasingly become the subject of a considerable amount of commemoration, especially at the time of its 50th and 60th anniversaries. This commemorative work has been performed in a broad range of medium.